7 Answers

  1. Nations are formed by religion. With the blessing of St. Sergius, Abbot of Radonezh, representatives of various Russian-speaking tribes who hated each other fiercely went to Kulikovo Field. Muscovites, Tverites, Vladimirites, Rezants, Suzdalians, Novgorodians, and others. Let's go die for our friends. Boyars, merchants and everyday people. And from there the Great Russians returned.

    “once not a people, but now the people of God”

    And still there are people who consider themselves Russians, love their Russian tribesmen, try to behave as is customary among Russian people, wish well to their tribesmen and are convinced of the commonality of their historical destiny with them. At the same time, they love neighbors, not distant ones, they love their father, mother, brothers and sisters, near and distant relatives, neighbors and friends. They love them for what they are, they don't want to make Soviet people out of them, they don't want to make some other people out of them, maybe better, cleaner, more correct. They understand these people.

    They want our native nature to be preserved, the rivers to become cleaner, the forests to expand, and not only people to thrive, but also fish, birds and animals.

    Is it blood-based? Or ideological? This is natural. There is no person outside the ethnic group. Everyone identifies with some ethnic group. Everyone is either Jewish, German, or Chechen.

  2. I don't believe in “Slavic unity” – suffice it to say that the Slavs include Poles or Bulgarians who have been shitting on us for centuries, and they didn't care about any “Slavic unity” at all. It was our Slavophiles who ran around with it: Slavic unity! We must free the Bulgarian brothers from the Turkish yoke! Released: the brothers immediately set themselves a German ruling dynasty and declared war on Russia in the First World War.

  3. Slavic unity is an ideologeme from a century ago. And if in the days of the Russian Empire, this ideologeme at least contained a political application for the unification of all Slavs under their own power, today, when we really can not agree with the Ukrainians, it just sounds funny. I suspect that modern Russians are on average much friendlier to China or Iran than to Ukraine. I'm not talking about other nationalities like Poles, and Serbs and Croats have made each other's hair stand on end in the past.

    Russian nationalism, as a kind of attempt to separate itself from the multinational Russian people, seems to me rather a perverted way of suicide and a parody of European nationalism – ridiculous, ridiculous and stupid.

    Nationalism in the realities of Russia will never lead to unity. Only to splits. Russia should look for other ways to achieve unity, and they should not lie in the plane of the nation, but in the plane of the entire people inhabiting the country. To remember, finally, that the ethnically closer inhabitant of Lviv is now much more alien to us than a fellow Chechen who speaks an unfamiliar language and professes the Muslim religion.

  4. Russian nationalism is a nonsense invented by a foreign church, which uses it to promote our non-competitiveness. No one has blood unity, it simply does not exist, in principle. But don't write a Russian ideology. Perhaps as an imperial, alliedfriendly for the languages and peoples we unite. What we don't have, we can't attribute to it.

  5. Russian nationalism is exclusively an ideological model, since imperialism is not compatible with”blood and soil”. Thanks to Russian imperialism, representatives of other peoples-from Ukrainians and Belarusians to Buryats and Chukchis-became as Russian as the native poskonnye Ivans and Marys from Sergiev Posad.

  6. Most often, these are people united by the lack of any culture and very superficial ideas about nationalism, which, upon closer examination, turn out to be Nazi.

    Personal experience with the so-called nationalists ends with the conclusion that their main idea is “beat the Hachis/Jews”, and the secondary task is to find out who is more Russian among those who beat them.

  7. Russian nationalism is an inaccurate generalization for several groups of organizations or political views that consider the strengthening of the “Russian nation”as their main goal. The “Russian nation” can mean anything from the white-skinned, fair-haired population of the Moscow Region to the population of the Russian Federation, including Yakuts and Evenks. The latter, by the way, is the most logical option, since there is no” Russian nation ” purely from Russians and never was. By the time the nation was formed, in the historical sense, on the territory of modern Russia, several “nationalities” participated in the creation of the state and society – at least Russians and Tatars, at most Russians, three Tatar peoples, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Finno-Ugric peoples, etc.

    Pan-Slavism is a completely different trend, characteristic of conservatives and some liberals in the second half of the XIX-early XX century. And here, by the way, Yegor Prosvirnin is absolutely wrong – it was in Poland that local nationalists, conservatives and liberals perceived the Russian Empire as a necessary tool for the revival of a united and strong Poland, and the Russians as the closest and most natural ally in the fight against the Germans. Yes, it's hard to believe, but once the light of the Polish nation (aha, they had a nation) treated Russians quite differently than it is now-take the same Sienkiewicz, who considered the great Russian classics as his teachers and did not hesitate to publish articles in Russian. All this, of course, could not be said about the local social Democrats, who were ready to tolerate a fragmented and small, but independent and “demonarchized” Poland.�

    In other Slavic countries, especially in the future Czechoslovakia, and then – Austrian Bohemia, in Galicia, in Serbia, in Bosnia and, especially, in Slovenia, national liberation movements grew, largely perceiving Russia as a stronghold of the Slavs and the hope of liberation from the “German” empires. In the same place, “Slavism” and nationalism began to interfere – for example, the Slovenes, who, in general, did not represent one nation and were called differently in different places, proudly called the territories recaptured from Austria Slovenia, i.e. the country of the Slavs, and simply called themselves Slovenes. Slavs (the Slovaks, by the way, also did not particularly get confused and also called their country Slovenia, but not to be confused, everyone calls it Slovakia). In general, I won't tell you for Bulgaria, but in other Slavic countries, local nationalists quite considered themselves part of a single Slavic community. Well, Google about the first nationalist groups – Sokol organizations, which came from Bohemia, but were almost everywhere – in Poland, in our country, etc.

    By the end of the 20th century, when all the Slavic peoples united under the common idea of socialism, the popularity of pan-Slavism faded – the reality turned out to be much sadder than the beautiful ideas about a huge country for millions of people who speak almost the same language, who are ruled by a wise tsar, etc.

    Nevertheless, even now some Russian nationalists, especially those with a religious bias, wiping a stingy nostalgic tear for those times, have invented the idea of a “Russian world”, which, in addition to the “purely Russian” Ukraine and Belarus, often includes Serbia, and even all Orthodox countries – among them, by the way, Romania and Bulgaria, which hate everyone, are the only social. camp country where Russians and Russia do not make any claims at all.

    And even though Bulgaria, although it was on the side of the enemies of Russia (the Triple Alliance and the “Axis”), but did not fight with Russia either in the First or Second World War: in the first, it did not fight with the Russians, but fought in the Balkans with Serbia and Romania, allied to Russia. In the second war, Bulgaria did not declare war on the USSR, and the condition for Bulgaria's participation in the war on the side of the Reich was precisely a guarantee that the Bulgarians would not have to participate in battles against their “brothers” and liberators. And yes, Bulgaria laid down its arms as soon as the first Soviet unit crossed its border. Well, yes, after that, local communists, with the support of the “liberators”, shot the entire Bulgarian elite, including the prince and regent of the country, Cyril.

    So don't push the Bulgarians here.

Leave a Reply

Categories